DOCSLIB.ORG

Iran and the GCC: Hedging, Pragmatism and Opportunism

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Iran and the GCC: Hedging, Pragmatism and Opportunism Research Paper Sanam Vakil Middle East and North Africa Programme | September 2018 Iran and the GCC Hedging, Pragmatism and Opportunism Iran and the GCC: Hedging, Pragmatism and Opportunism Summary • The withdrawal of the US from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) has renewed international attention on Iran’s interventions in the Middle East. • While much of the Middle East leadership sees Iran as an adept foreign policy actor, which has successfully increased its influence and leverage in Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and Yemen, the country has few meaningful, conventional bilateral relationships. • Iran’s relations with the Gulf states are guided by opportunism rather than an overarching strategy. Traditionally, Tehran has focused on Israeli and US threats in the Middle East rather than relations with its southern Gulf neighbours. • Over the years, instead of dealing with the GCC as a bloc, Tehran has pursued bilateral relations with Oman, Kuwait, Qatar and the UAE, capitalizing on internal GCC tensions, which have escalated since the 2017 Qatar crisis. These ties have enabled Tehran to protect itself from past US-led isolation and containment efforts, but have not graduated beyond reactionary, pragmatic engagement. • Gulf states, being cognizant of their geography and proximity to Iran and Saudi Arabia, have engaged with Tehran as part of a hedging strategy to balance against pressure from Riyadh. As seen by the Qatar crisis, this hedging policy has exposed deep divisions among the Arab Gulf states. Without accommodation and resolution of the Qatar crisis, relations among the Gulf countries will remain fragmented and encourage further regional instability. • Saudi–Iranian relations have dramatically deteriorated, despite a short period of rapprochement. Riyadh sees Iran as the principal regional threat and is cooperating with Washington to pressure and weaken Tehran. Conversely, for decades, Tehran has not considered Riyadh to be a serious regional challenge. It is only in the wake of forthcoming sanctions and Saudi cooperation with the Trump administration that Iran realizes the destabilizing effect of its tensions with Saudi Arabia. This prompted the Rouhani administration to call for dialogue between the two countries. • Increased pressure from Washington and from within the region has led Tehran to slowly acknowledge that resolving regional tensions is a necessary ingredient for its domestic and regional stability. Iran’s solution to this is the creation of a new regional security framework. While Saudi Arabia will oppose this, the GCC states with a history of pragmatically dealing with Iran have the potential to facilitate such an outcome and, in the absence of a functioning GCC, can benefit from a new regional security framework that acknowledges the concerns of all states. • Ultimately, to be successful and durable, regional de-escalation will require recognition and compromise on the major security issues before addressing the economic and humanitarian portfolios. This will also require the smaller Gulf states, as well as extra-regional actors, to encourage Iran and Saudi Arabia to recognize the exigencies of the changing regional geostrategic landscape and to move beyond short-term calculations and one-upmanship in favour of long-term stability. 1 | Chatham House Iran and the GCC: Hedging, Pragmatism and Opportunism Introduction In recent years political tensions in the Middle East have reached new heights over the intersecting crises stemming from the Syrian civil war, the unravelling of the Iran nuclear agreement, the war in Yemen, and the Qatar crisis. The common denominator in these events is the direct or indirect involvement of Iran. The country’s increased regional activity since its 2012 intervention in Syria has stoked anger and anxiety in the Gulf states, which fear Iran’s regional hegemonic ambitions. The Gulf states felt abandoned by the US under the Obama administration, which they believed prioritized the nuclear agreement ahead of pressuring Iran over its regional policies. From the perspective of the Gulf states this has led to Iran’s destabilizing influence spreading, which is evidenced by its support for Bashar al-Assad in the Syrian civil war, its military support for the Houthis in the Yemen civil war, its ongoing relationship with Lebanon’s Hezbollah, and its relations with Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) in Iraq. Iran has also repeatedly been accused of fomenting unrest and supporting the principally Shia opposition in Bahrain. Map 1: Iran and the GCC states Caspian Ashgabad TURKEY Sea TURKMENISTAN Al Mawşil H¸ alab Mashhad Arbil SYRIAN Tehran Cyprus Tripoli ARAB Kirkuk Herat REPUBLIC Mediterranean Sea LEBANON AFGHANISTAN Beirut Damascus Baghdad ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN ISRAEL Kandahar IRAQ Eşfahan Alexandria Port ’Amman Said Cairo Suez JORDAN Al ‘Aqabah Kuwait Shiraz Al Minya KUWAIT PAKISTAN Persian Gulf Asyut LIBYA BAHRAIN ormuz H of Al Manamah . EGYPT Ad Damman tr OMAN S Karachi Al Hufuf QATAR Dubai Doha Gulf of Oman Aswan Medina Riyadh Abu Dhabi UNITED ARAB Muscat SAUDI ARABIA EMIRATES Jeddah OMAN Mecca Red Sea Arabian Sea SUDAN Jizan Khartoum ERITREA Sanaa YEMEN National capital Asmara (Şan’a’) Major city Al H¸ udaydah Al Mukalla International boundary Socotra Aden Gulf of Aden DJIBOUTI ETHIOPIA Djibouti 0 200 400 600 800 km 0 100 200 300 400 500 mi SOMALIA SOUTH SUDAN Source: UN Geospatial Information Section, http://www.un.org/Depts/Cartographic/map/profile/mideastr.pdf. The boundaries and names on this map do not imply endorsement or acceptance by Chatham House. 2 | Chatham House Iran and the GCC: Hedging, Pragmatism and Opportunism In response, Iran argues that its regional relationships and activities are by invitation, that they are purely defensive, and are designed to achieve the strategic depth needed to repel threats away from Iran’s borders. For the last four decades, Iran’s regional position has been motivated by opposition to Israel and hostility with the US, which has a significant military presence in the Middle East. Tensions with Saudi Arabia have also become a factor in Iran’s regional calculations, especially as Saudi Arabia has sought to build an anti-Iranian regional coalition. In concert with Israel, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and the US, since the election of President Donald Trump, Saudi Arabia has made efforts to roll back Iranian influence and has repeatedly accused it of inflaming sectarian divides and sponsoring terrorism in the region. To counter this coalition, President Hassan Rouhani has tried to reduce the tension with Saudi Arabia through mediation by Kuwait and Oman in 2017. He has also argued for an all-inclusive regional security architecture. However, for the time being, pervasive mistrust on both sides has rendered such initiatives moot. Iran argues that its regional relationships and activities are by invitation, that they are purely defensive, and are designed to achieve the strategic depth needed to repel threats away from Iran’s borders. Iran is perceived across the region to be successful and strategic, but in fact its policies are opportunistic and it lacks a grand strategy. Opportunism has become Iran's principal avenue for relationships in the region, which has entrenched feelings of distrust towards it. Since the Iranian revolution in 1979, the country has had little by way of deep, conventional interaction with its Gulf neighbours. Rather than build strong bilateral relations based on shared national, economic or regional interests, Iran's ties with the Gulf states are based on convenient openings stemming from intra-Arab tensions and the miscalculations of others, such as Saudi Arabia. Iran has managed to bolster its regional position by taking advantage or widespread frustration and heightened tensions among the members of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) – Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar and the UAE – particularly since the outbreak of the Qatar crisis in 2017. Over the years, Iran has cultivated mutually beneficial and pragmatic bilateral relations with the smaller GCC states of Oman, Qatar, Kuwait and the UAE. In doing so, Iran has brought itself out of regional isolation, diversified its relationship portfolio and gained political capital by exploiting divisions within the council. These relationships tend to be fleeting, but they provide Iran with economic and political lifelines. To better comprehend the drivers and divisions in regional relations, at a time of heightened tensions, this paper explores Iran’s opportunistic foreign policy towards the Gulf states with a principal focus on Oman, Qatar, Kuwait and the UAE – the four countries that have maintained and developed regular relations with Iran. Understanding the history, nature and orientation of these various relationships can shed light on the limits of, and opportunities for, broader regional engagement with Iran and for regional de-escalation. The paper draws upon research, interviews, workshop discussions and conversations with political actors and analysts in Iran and the GCC countries. Regional tensions through a historical lens Difficult relations between Iran and the Gulf states are not a new development. Throughout recent history, disagreements have arisen due to internal political developments, sectarian and ethnic differences, and strategic and territorial rivalries. Extra-regional influence and interference, first by the UK and then the US, has also impeded regional ties. As a result of the Iranian revolution, recent 3 | Chatham House
Load more

Recommended publications
  • KING ABDULLAH's GAME: AUTOCRATS and GLOBALIZED INTERESTS a Thesis Submitted to the Kent State University Honors College In
    KING ABDULLAH’S GAME: AUTOCRATS AND GLOBALIZED INTERESTS A thesis submitted to the Kent State University Honors College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for University Honors by Sarah Jane Krisanda May, 2013 Thesis written by Sarah Jane Krisanda Approved by ________________________________________________________________, Advisor ________________________________________, Chair, Department of Political Science Accepted by _____________________________________________________, Dean, Honors College ii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES………………………………………………………………………iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS……………………………………………………………….v CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………...1 II. CONTEXT……………………………………………………………….14 III. INTEREST COALITION MODEL……………………………………...32 IV. ISLAMIC INTEREST COALITION NETWORK……………………...40 V. STATUS QUO INTEREST COALITION NETWORK………………...50 VI. REFORM INTEREST COALITION NETWORK……………………...56 VII. CONCLUSION…………………………………………………………..71 REFERENCES…………………………………………………………………………..74 iii LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1………………………………………………………………………………..37 FIGURE 2………………………………………………………………………………..41 FIGURE 3………………………………………………………………………………..56 iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This thesis is a product of two years of laughter, tears, triumph, pain, and a whole lot of helpful people. I want to thank Virginia, David, and John Krisanda for their unconditional love and support. Thanks to my entire family for all your prayers and encouragement. Thank you, Hamish Wallace and all my brothers from Alpha Phi Omega for everything. Thank you Jamie Johnson, Melisa Michael, and Victoria Sack for bringing me tea every time I pulled an all-nighter. I could not ask for better friends. Many thanks go to Jeanne Smith and Gina DeNardi. I appreciate all of the guidance you have given me about writing and life. You kept me sane, and you forever changed the way I think about learning. Thank you for always believing in me. I appreciate the scholars of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. Special thanks go to Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Israeli–Palestinian Peacemaking January 2019 Middle East and North the Role of the Arab States Africa Programme
    Briefing Israeli–Palestinian Peacemaking January 2019 Middle East and North The Role of the Arab States Africa Programme Yossi Mekelberg Summary and Greg Shapland • The positions of several Arab states towards Israel have evolved greatly in the past 50 years. Four of these states in particular – Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the UAE and (to a lesser extent) Jordan – could be influential in shaping the course of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. • In addition to Egypt and Jordan (which have signed peace treaties with Israel), Saudi Arabia and the UAE, among other Gulf states, now have extensive – albeit discreet – dealings with Israel. • This evolution has created a new situation in the region, with these Arab states now having considerable potential influence over the Israelis and Palestinians. It also has implications for US positions and policy. So far, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the UAE and Jordan have chosen not to test what this influence could achieve. • One reason for the inactivity to date may be disenchantment with the Palestinians and their cause, including the inability of Palestinian leaders to unite to promote it. However, ignoring Palestinian concerns will not bring about a resolution of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, which will continue to add to instability in the region. If Arab leaders see regional stability as being in their countries’ interests, they should be trying to shape any eventual peace plan advanced by the administration of US President Donald Trump in such a way that it forms a framework for negotiations that both Israeli and Palestinian leaderships can accept. Israeli–Palestinian Peacemaking: The Role of the Arab States Introduction This briefing forms part of the Chatham House project, ‘Israel–Palestine: Beyond the Stalemate’.
    [Show full text]
  • International Spectator
    This article was downloaded by:[UVA Universiteitsbibliotheek SZ] On: 9 December 2007 Access Details: [subscription number 769895062] Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK International Spectator Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t768481834 Saudi Arabia Walks the Tightrope Paul Aarts Online Publication Date: 01 December 2007 To cite this Article: Aarts, Paul (2007) 'Saudi Arabia Walks the Tightrope', International Spectator, 42:4, 545 - 550 To link to this article: DOI: 10.1080/03932720701780413 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03932720701780413 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf This article maybe used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material. Saudi Arabia Walks the Tightrope Paul Aarts These are times of ascendency for Saudi foreign policy.
    [Show full text]
  • Rising to Iran's Challenge
    RISING TO IRAN’S CHALLENGE GCC Military Capability and U.S. Security Cooperation Michael Knights Policy Focus 127 | June 2013 THE WASHINGTON INSTITUTE FOR NEAR EAST POLICY RISING TO IRAN’S CHALLENGE GCC Military Capability and U.S. Security Cooperation Michael Knights Policy Focus 127 | June 2013 All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. © 2013 by The Washington Institute for Near East Policy Published in 2013 in the United States of America by The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, 1828 L Street NW, Suite 1050, Washington, DC 20036. Cover photo: UAE, Italian, Bahraini, and U.S. armed forces sight in on a mock target while performing a Visit, Board, Search, and Seizure demonstration at the Port of Zayed area in Abu Dhabi, UAE, as part of Exercise Leading Edge 13, January 2013. Leading Edge 13 military-to-military engagements are intended to sharpen capabilities among nations in an effort to foster relationships and build regional security. (USMC photo/MSgt. Salvatore Cardella) CONTENTS The Author v Acknowledgments vii Executive Summary ix 1 | Introduction 1 2 | SWOT Analysis of the Gulf Militaries 7 3 | Key Missions for GCC Allies 23 4 | Implications for U.S. Security Cooperation 37 THE AUTHOR MICHAEL KNIGHTS is a Lafer fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, specializing in the military and security affairs of Iraq, Iran, Libya, Yemen, and the Gulf states.
    [Show full text]
  • Crisis, Reform, Or Stagnation?
    DISCUSSION PAPER Saudi Arabia under Muhammed Bin Salman: Crisis, Reform, or Stagnation? Ebrar Şahika Küçükaşcı DISCUSSION PAPER Saudi Arabia under Muhammed Bin Salman: Crisis, Reform, or Stagnation? Ebrar Şahika Küçükaşcı Saudi Arabia under Muhammed Bin Salman: Crisis, Reform, or Stagnation? © TRT WORLD RESEARCH CENTRE ALL RIGHTS RESERVED WRITTEN BY Ebrar Şahika Küçükaşcı PUBLISHER TRT WORLD RESEARCH CENTRE November 2019 PHOTO CREDIT ANADOLU AGENCY TRT WORLD İSTANBUL AHMET ADNAN SAYGUN STREET NO:83 34347 ULUS, BEŞİKTAŞ İSTANBUL / TURKEY TRT WORLD LONDON PORTLAND HOUSE 4 GREAT PORTLAND STREET NO:4 LONDON / UNITED KINGDOM TRT WORLD WASHINGTON D.C. 1819 L STREET NW SUITE, 700 20036 WASHINGTON DC / UNITED STATES www.trtworld.com researchcentre.trtworld.com The opinions expressed in this discussion paper represent the views of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the TRT World Research Centre. 4 Saudi Arabia under Muhammed Bin Salman: Crisis, Reform, or Stagnation? Introduction ince 2015, the world has witnessed In other words, MBS is an exception to his Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad predecessors, who only tried to modernise the bin Salman’s (MBS) ascension to country superficially. power and his ensuing designs to initiate top-down economic and However, upon closer inspection, it is clear that cultural reforms in Saudi Arabia. In the modernisation attempts of MBS have several Sthese four years, MBS has not only asserted himself inherent deficiencies, and will most likely fall short both domestically and internationally, but has also just like his predecessors’ efforts. On the one hand, established a positive framing of himself through his the planning process is widely viewed as being narrative of reform.
    [Show full text]
  • Changed Priorities in the Gulf: Saudi Arabia and the Emirates Rethink
    Introduction Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik German Institute for International and Security Affairs Comments Changed Priorities in the Gulf WP Saudi Arabia and the Emirates Rethink Their Relationship with Egypt Matthias Sailer S Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) are likely to scale back noticeably on their generous financial gifts to Egypt under its President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi. In the one year that King Salman has ruled Saudi Arabia, the kingdom has improved rela- tions with the Muslim Brotherhood, an organization the Egyptian regime portrays as the source of all evil. Riyadh’s overriding priority is now to stem Iran’s influence in the region, particularly in Yemen and Syria. However, in Syria especially, al-Sisi’s stance diverges from Saudi Arabia’s. Moreover, both Riyadh and Abu Dhabi are frustrated by the lack of progress Egypt has made in improving its financial, economic and security situation. In addition, low oil prices have brought about a more restrictive spending policy in the Gulf. Consequently, for the first time since the overthrow of President Mohammed Morsi, Germany and the EU have an opportunity to push for change in Egypt by offering financial support that is made conditional on implementing measures to increase political participation and improve governance. Between 2011 and the death of the Saudi Gulf Cooperation Council, primarily from King Abdullah in January 2015, Saudi and Saudi Arabia and the UAE, marched into UAE regional policies primarily targeted Bahrain. Their mission was to support Bah- preventing the so-called Arab Spring from rain’s ruling family in violently putting spilling over onto the Arab Peninsula.
    [Show full text]
  • Denied Dignity RIGHTS Systematic Discrimination and Hostility Toward Saudi Shia Citizens WATCH
    Saudi Arabia HUMAN Denied Dignity RIGHTS Systematic Discrimination and Hostility toward Saudi Shia Citizens WATCH Denied Dignity Systematic Discrimination and Hostility toward Saudi Shia Citizens Copyright © 2009 Human Rights Watch All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America ISBN: 1-56432-535-0 Cover design by Rafael Jimenez Human Rights Watch 350 Fifth Avenue, 34th floor New York, NY 10118-3299 USA Tel: +1 212 290 4700, Fax: +1 212 736 1300 [email protected] Poststraße 4-5 10178 Berlin, Germany Tel: +49 30 2593 06-10, Fax: +49 30 2593 0629 [email protected] Avenue des Gaulois, 7 1040 Brussels, Belgium Tel: + 32 (2) 732 2009, Fax: + 32 (2) 732 0471 [email protected] 64-66 Rue de Lausanne 1202 Geneva, Switzerland Tel: +41 22 738 0481, Fax: +41 22 738 1791 [email protected] 2-12 Pentonville Road, 2nd Floor London N1 9HF, UK Tel: +44 20 7713 1995, Fax: +44 20 7713 1800 [email protected] 27 Rue de Lisbonne 75008 Paris, France Tel: +33 (1)43 59 55 35, Fax: +33 (1) 43 59 55 22 [email protected] 1630 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Suite 500 Washington, DC 20009 USA Tel: +1 202 612 4321, Fax: +1 202 612 4333 [email protected] Web Site Address: http://www.hrw.org September 2009 1-56432-535-0 Denied Dignity Systematic Discrimination and Hostility toward Saudi Shia Citizens I. Summary ......................................................................................................................... 1 Recommendations to the Government of Saudi Arabia ................................................... 2 Methodology .................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Rivalry in the Middle East: the History of Saudi-Iranian Relations and Its Implications on American Foreign Policy
    BearWorks MSU Graduate Theses Summer 2017 Rivalry in the Middle East: The History of Saudi-Iranian Relations and its Implications on American Foreign Policy Derika Weddington Missouri State University, [email protected] As with any intellectual project, the content and views expressed in this thesis may be considered objectionable by some readers. However, this student-scholar’s work has been judged to have academic value by the student’s thesis committee members trained in the discipline. The content and views expressed in this thesis are those of the student-scholar and are not endorsed by Missouri State University, its Graduate College, or its employees. Follow this and additional works at: https://bearworks.missouristate.edu/theses Part of the Defense and Security Studies Commons, International Relations Commons, and the Near and Middle Eastern Studies Commons Recommended Citation Weddington, Derika, "Rivalry in the Middle East: The History of Saudi-Iranian Relations and its Implications on American Foreign Policy" (2017). MSU Graduate Theses. 3129. https://bearworks.missouristate.edu/theses/3129 This article or document was made available through BearWorks, the institutional repository of Missouri State University. The work contained in it may be protected by copyright and require permission of the copyright holder for reuse or redistribution. For more information, please contact [email protected]. RIVALRY IN THE MIDDLE EAST: THE HISTORY OF SAUDI-IRANIAN RELATIONS AND ITS IMPLICATIONS ON AMERICAN FOREIGN POLICY A Masters Thesis Presented to The Graduate College of Missouri State University TEMPLATE In Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science, Defense and Strategic Studies By Derika Weddington August 2017 RIVALARY IN THE MIDDLE EAST: THE HISTORY OF SAUDI-IRANIAN RELATIONS AND ITS IMPLICATIONS ON AMERICAN FOREIGN POLICY Defense and Strategic Studies Missouri State University, August 2017 Master of Science Derika Weddington ABSTRACT The history of Saudi-Iranian relations has been fraught.
    [Show full text]
  • The Saudi-Iranian Meeting: Momentary Reconciliation Prior to Escalation? Yoel Guzansky
    INSS Insight No. 364, August 20, 2012 The Saudi-Iranian Meeting: Momentary Reconciliation prior to Escalation? Yoel Guzansky King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia and Iranian President Ahmadinejad met in Mecca last week at an emergency summit of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), which decided to suspend Syria’s membership in the organization. This decision is mainly symbolic, but Ahmadinejad's participation at the OIC meeting on Saudi soil at this time was as surprising as was the invitation itself. Ahmadinejad, who headed a delegation of senior officials, had visited Saudi Arabia previously (December 2005 and March 2007), but given the events in Syria and the increased tension between Iran and Saudi Arabia, his visit carries significant weight. The two main ideological and geostrategic rivals in the Middle East appear to be attempting to bridge their differences and maintain open channels of communication, if only for tactical reasons. A year ago, King Abdullah spoke publicly against Assad for the first time. The exceptionally tough statement by the Saudi king, who demanded “to stop the killing machine,” was additional evidence that Saudi Arabia was pitted against the radical axis led by Iran, after a similar stance in Bahrain. Saudi Arabia, which is aiding the opposition in Syria, would like to see Assad fall, if only because this would cause Iran to lose its main ally, undermine the radical alignment, and give the Saudis the opportunity to lead a Sunni camp that is larger and more cohesive than in the past. This would occur if the Sunnis do in fact seize power in Syria.
    [Show full text]
  • Remarks Following Discussions with Crown Prince Abdullah of Saudi Arabia and an Exchange with Reporters in Crawford, Texas April 25, 2002
    Administration of George W. Bush, 2002 / Apr. 25 for loving that child with all your heart It is an honor, a high honor, to be the and all your soul, and if you’re a good President of the greatest land on the face citizen, you’re responsible for loving a of the Earth. Thank you for giving me that neighbor. And that’s what’s happening in privilege. May God bless you all. God bless. America. This is a great country. I can’t tell you NOTE: The President spoke at 6:33 p.m. at how optimistic I am about the future of the Sioux Falls Arena. In his remarks, he re- our land. I’m optimistic that we’ll achieve ferred to senatorial candidate John Thune; peace. I’m optimistic that we will stand Gov. William J. Janklow of South Dakota and squarely in the face of evil, with acts of his wife, Mary Dean Janklow; and Joel Rosenthal, chairman, Ron Schmidt, national kindness and decency. And I’m optimistic committeeman, and Mary Jean Jensen, na- that this country will remain the most tional committeewoman, South Dakota Re- hopeful place on the face of the Earth. publican Party. Remarks Following Discussions With Crown Prince Abdullah of Saudi Arabia and an Exchange With Reporters in Crawford, Texas April 25, 2002 The President. Good afternoon. I was We discussed the need for Arab states honored to welcome Crown Prince to condemn terror, to stop incitement of Abdullah to my ranch, a place that is very violence, and as part of a long-term peace, special for me and a place where I wel- to accept Israel as a nation and a neighbor.
    [Show full text]
  • The Arab Peace Initiative: a Primer and Future Prospects
    Joshua Teitelbaum The Arab Peace Initiative: A Primer and Future Prospects המרכז הירושלמי לענייני ציבור ומדינה Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs Joshua Teitelbaum The Arab Peace Initiative: A Primer and Future Prospects המרכז הירושלמי לענייני ציבור ומדינה Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs © 2009 Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs 13 Tel-Hai St., Jerusalem, Israel Tel. 972-2-561-9281 | Fax. 972-2-561-9112 Email: [email protected] | www.jcpa.org ISBN 978-965-218-071-1 Producon Coordinator: Odelia Zaguri Graphic Design: Gama Design Pictures Credits: AP Photo Cover photo: Arab leaders pose at the Arab League Summit in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, March 28, 2007. All photos are from AP and used with permission. The Arab Peace Initiative: A Primer and Future Prospects Joshua Teitelbaum • In the wake of the terrorist aacks on September 11, 2001, Saudi Arabia was under intense scruny since fi een of the nineteen 9/11 hijackers had proved to be Saudis. In February 2002, Crown Prince Abdullah of Saudi Arabia gave an interview to New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman in which he proposed to Israel “full withdrawal from all the occupied territories, in accord with UN resoluons, including in Jerusalem, for full normalizaon of relaons.” • In a flash, Abdullah had transformed the discourse: Instead of focusing on Saudi involvement in terrorism, the Western press was now talking about Saudi peacemaking. However, by the me the Abdullah trial balloon reached the Arab summit in Beirut in March 2002, the iniave had been modified and its terms hardened. • “Full normalizaon” became “normal relaons” (which sll marks significant progress over the Arab League formulaon in Khartoum of 1967: “no peace, no recognion, no negoaons”).
    [Show full text]
  • Arab League's Syrian Policy
    SETA Policy Brief SETA | Foundation for Political, Economic and Social Research | April, 2012 | www.setav.org | Brief No: 56 Arab League’s Syrian Policy Müjge Küçükkeleş S E TA POLICY BRIEF ABSTRACT Suspension of Syria’s Arab League membership in November 2011 could be characterized as a turning point in Arab league’s 66-year old history. By condemning the Syrian and Libyan regimes for disproportionate use of violence against their own people, the Arab League has somewhat found rightful the demand of Arab people. the League has signaled with these decisions that it would move away from ideas of Arab nationalism and Arab unity in pursuit of further integration with the international system. On the other hand, the authoritarian state systems of most of the member states of the League make it difficult to regard Arab League decisions as steps supporting democracy. The League’s ‘‘democratic stance’’ is an outcome of the pressure of revolutions as much as of harmony of interests among the member states. Even though strengthening democracy in the region seems like an unrealistic desire of member states, these decisions push each member towards thinking about change and thus pave the way for democratic reform process. The study at hand consists of two parts. The first part addresses the League’s policy proposals, decisions, and reactions regarding the Syrian crisis and concentrates on what these all policy measures mean for the League as a regional organization. The second part examines regional dynamics that play a crucial role in the current crisis by looking at different positions of regional and global actors on the Syrian crisis.
    [Show full text]